Electrocatalytic CO2 Reduction by Imidazolium-Functionalized

Sep 18, 2017 - We present the first examples of CO2 electro-reduction catalysts that feature charged imidazolium groups in the secondary coordination ...
7 downloads 17 Views 1MB Size
Download PDF
Communication pubs.acs.org/JACS

Electrocatalytic CO2 Reduction by Imidazolium-Functionalized Molecular Catalysts Siyoung Sung,† Davinder Kumar,†,‡ Marcos Gil-Sepulcre,§ and Michael Nippe*,† †

Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, 3255 TAMU, College Station, Texas 77843, United States School of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Thapar University, Patiala, Punjab 147004, India § Departament de Química, Facultat de Ciències, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, 08193 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain ‡

S Supporting Information *

to improve electrocatalytic CO2 reduction by metal porphyrin complexes.7 Our work is inspired by reports of efficient direct CO2 reduction in ethyl-methyl-imidazolium (EMIM)-based ionic liquids on electrode materials8 as well as by homogeneous catalysts.9 We hypothesized that the incorporation of charged, slightly acidic, and redox-active imidazolium groups into the secondary coordination sphere of molecular complexes may provide alternative routes to tune redox potentials as well as allow for synergistic intramolecular interactions between reactive metal sites, imidazolium, and CO2 substrate molecules. To test our hypothesis we functionalized the CO2 electro (and photo)-reduction catalyst system based on Re(bpy)(CO)3Cl which was first discovered by Lehn et al.10 and has been subject of detailed mechanistic studies.11 Here, we present the first evaluation of imidazolium-functionalized CO2 electro-reduction catalysts. We utilized precatalyst {Re[bpyMe(ImMe)](CO)3Cl}PF6 (1PF6) (Figure 1) and compared its redox properties and catalytic activity to those of unfunctionalized Re(bpy)(CO)3Cl (3). To evaluate the possible involvement of the imidazolium C2−H bond of 1PF6 during catalysis, we expanded our studies to include {Re[bpyMe(ImMe2)](CO)3Cl]PF6 (2PF6) which is devoid of aforementioned C− H bond. The functionalized complexes 1PF6 and 2PF6 were obtained as described in the Supporting Information. The molecular structures of 1+ and 2+ (Figure 1, Tables S1 and S2) feature octahedral Re(I) ions with Re−N, Re−Ceq, Re−Cax, and Re−Cl distances of 2.206[3] Å (2+: 2.224[6] Å), 1.916[5] Å (2+: 1.925[9] Å), 1.924(5) Å (2+: 1.993(9) Å), and 2.485(1) Å (2+: 2.462(2) Å), respectively, which are comparable to those reported for related Re(CO)3Cl complexes.12 Importantly, the structure of 1PF6 features close proximity between imidazolium C2−H groups and Re-bound chloride ions of a neighboring molecule which likely indicates hydrogen-bonding like or electrostatic interactions between them in the solid state.13 Binding between imidazolium moieties and anions in a C2− H···X− fashion has been broadly utilized for the sensing of anions in solution.14 We therefore suggest that similar C2−H··· X− interactions have also to be considered in solutions of 1PF6 and may include intramolecular C2−H···Cl− as well as C2−H···

ABSTRACT: We present the first examples of CO2 electro-reduction catalysts that feature charged imidazolium groups in the secondary coordination sphere. The functionalized Lehn-type catalysts display significant differences in their redox properties and improved catalytic activities as compared to the conventional reference catalyst. Our results suggest that the incorporated imidazolium moieties do not solely function as a charged tag but also alter mechanistic aspects of catalysis.

T

he development of selective electrocatalysts for the reduction of carbon dioxide (CO2) to yield C1 products such as CO (2e−), HCHO (4e−), CH3OH (6e−), and CH4 (8e−) or higher Cn products would allow for a broad utilization of CO2 as a C1 feedstock.1 However, the typically high energy barriers for the direct reduction of CO2 on electrode or semiconductor surfaces necessitate reduction potentials significantly more negative than the corresponding thermodynamic CO2 reduction potentials. The development of improved electrocatalysts which can lower overpotential requirements while maintaining appropriate catalytic rates and selectivity is therefore a key challenge toward future solar-driven CO2 conversion technologies.2 Molecular catalysts are an attractive option due to the high degree of tunability of electronic and geometric parameters which allows for systematic reactivity studies that can lead to new catalyst design guidelines. For example, electron density at the reactive metal ion is readily tunable via incorporation of electron-withdrawing or -donating groups into the ligand backbone, which results in positively or negatively shifted redox potentials, respectively.3 However, lowering electron density at the reactive transition metal ion does allow for less negative reduction potentials only at the cost of significantly decreased catalytic activity.4 More recently, focus has been given to tuning molecular electro-reduction catalysts via incorporation of functional groups into the secondary coordination sphere of transition metal complexes. Relevant examples include the incorporation of steric bulk5 and incorporation of functional groups as proton relays and/or facilitators for substrate binding via hydrogenbonding interactions, as well as intermediate stabilization.6 Very recently, positively charged ammonium groups have also shown © 2017 American Chemical Society

Received: July 23, 2017 Published: September 18, 2017 13993

DOI: 10.1021/jacs.7b07709 J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 13993−13996

Communication

Journal of the American Chemical Society

functional theory (see Supporting Information). Importantly, the highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) of the 1e− reduced species 1(1e) (S = 1/2) is exclusively centered on the π* system of the bipyridine moiety (Figure 1c). No contributions from the imidazolium unit to the HOMO are observed. We therefore assign the initial reduction of 1+ and 2+ to the 1e− reduction of the bipyridine moiety which parallels the initial redox behavior of unfunctionalized 3. The altered reversibility of the initial redox couples for 1+ and 2+ is therefore likely the result of accelerated Cl− dissociation rates. Simulations of the CV profiles at varying scan rates according to an EC mechanism (Figure S3) suggests a ∼5.4 times faster chloride dissociation rate for 1PF6 than for 2PF6. We suggest that intramolecular C2−H···Cl− interactions may allow for faster dissociation of Cl− from the one-electron-reduced species 1(1e) (Figure 2). Electrostatic and C4,5-H···Cl− interactions may contribute to the faster Cl− dissociation observed for 2PF6 as compared to 3. It is also important to note that this stands in contrast to reports for 3 in neat EMIM-based ionic liquids for which two 1e− reductions can precede Cl− dissociation.16 Consequently, we argue that the intramolecular incorporation of imidazolium moieties allows for distinct chemistry as compared to intermolecular imidazolium−catalyst systems. The diffusion coefficients of 1+, 2+, and 3 are similar as judged by DOSY NMR spectroscopy (Figures S4−S6) and rotating disk electrode voltammetry (Figures S7−S9), which suggests that (i) 1+ is not dimeric in solution and (ii) diffusional behavior is not significantly affected by functionalization. The activities of all complexes toward electrocatalytic reduction of CO2 were investigated using identical conditions in CO2 saturated CH3CN solutions (Figure 3). Functionalized

Figure 1. Molecular structures of (a) 1+ and (b) 2+ and (c) HOMO of calculated neutral species 1(1e) (S = 1/2). Color code: purple = Re, green = Cl, red = oxygen, blue = nitrogen, gray = carbon). Hydrogen atoms (other than imidazolium C−H, shown in black), counteranion(s), and co-crystallized solvent molecules have been omitted for clarity.

CO2− and C2−H···OH2 interactions (vide inf ra) during catalysis. The cyclic voltammograms (CVs) of 1+, 2+, and 3 recorded in CH3CN under Ar (Figure S2) display initial redox couples at −1.65, −1.65, and −1.74 V, respectively (Table S3). The ∼100 mV positive shift in E1/2 for the initial redox couple for 1+ and 2+ as compared to 3 is a likely consequence of the positive charge introduced by the imidazolium moiety. Reversibility of the initial redox couples of 1+ and 2+ becomes more apparent at faster scan rates (Figure 2). It is well established that the first 1e− reduction of 3 yields [Re(I)(bpy•−)(CO)3Cl]− which features a bipyridine based radical species. Importantly, the cationic ligands employed in 1+ and 2+ feature not only a redoxactive bpy moiety but also a redox-active imidazolium group which could potentially be reduced by one electron to yield a neutral radical species.15 We thought to investigate the origin of the first 1e− reduction observed for 1+ via computational methods using density

Figure 3. CVs of 1.0 mM 1+ (red), 2+ (blue), and 3 (black) recorded at 100 mV s−1 under CO2 in CH3CN (0.1 M NBu4PF6).

complexes 1+ and 2+ exhibit comparable reductive current enhancement following the initial 1e− reduction event under CO2. Most notably, the current enhancement occurs at significantly less negative potentials as compared to reference complex 3. Catalytic half-wave potentials (Table S3) of reductive current enhancements of 1+ and 2+ are ∼170 and 140 mV less negative than that of 3. The ratios of catalytic peak currents (icat) and initial peak currents (ip; peak current of the initial 1e− reduction under Ar at the same scan rate) are also given in Table S3.4a,17 Interestingly, for 1+ we find a icat/ip ratio of 4.7 which is higher than the one observed for 3 (4.4), even though the corresponding catalytic potential is significantly more positive than that of 3. However, for complex 2+, we observe smaller icat/ip (3.5) as compared to 3. We also note that the potential differences between the initial 1e− reduction and onset (or half-wave) potential of catalysis is much smaller for 1+ (ΔE = 100 mV) as compared to 2+ (150 mV) and 3 (180 mV) at a given scan rate. The latter observation (ΔE) further

Figure 2. (a, b) Scan rate dependence of initial reduction of 1+ and 2+ under Ar (normalized current (I/ν−1/2) shown). (c) Proposed imidazolium-promoted Cl− dissociation in 1+ upon 1e− reduction. 13994

DOI: 10.1021/jacs.7b07709 J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 13993−13996

Communication

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Figure 4. Effect of [H2O] on catalytic response under CO2 by (a) 1+, (b) 2+, and (c) 3 at 100 mV s−1. Insets display icat/ip values over various [H2O]. (d) Scan rate dependence of TOFmax (according to eq 1) for 1+ (red), 2+ (blue), and 3 (black). All CVs were recorded in a CH3CN solution of 1.0 mM catalyst, 0.1 M NBu4PF6 under CO2.

supports the hypothesis that Cl− dissociation after 1e− reduction is accelerated for 1+, while the former (icat/ip) may indicate synergistic effects of the C2−H group in 1+ for CO2 reduction catalysis, leading to higher current densities. Although CO2 itself can act as an oxide acceptor during catalysis,11a the addition of a proton source can facilitate the two-electron and two-proton reduction of CO2 to CO and we decided to utilize H2O as a proton source. CVs of 1+, 2+, and 3 were recorded under CO2 with cumulative addition of H2O. Ratios of icat over ip were plotted versus concentration of H2O and are presented in insets of Figure 4. Both imidazoliumfunctionalized catalysts show similar current responses to the addition of H2O. Catalytic currents of 1+ and 2+ drastically increase upon addition of a small amounts of H2O, which results in significant increase in icat/ip values from ∼4 to 9 at a low H2O concentration (0.28 M). Interestingly, the catalytic currents decrease up to ∼1 M H2O and increase again upon further addition of H2O displaying the highest icat/ip values (∼12 and 10 for 1+ and 2+, respectively) at 2−3 M H2O. The catalytic currents start to decrease gradually at concentrations higher than 3 M H2O. It should also be noted that catalytic half-wave potentials gradually shift to more positive potentials as the H2O concentration increases. At high [H2O], catalytic onset potentials are close to those where the initial 1e− reduction was observed. In general, 1+ exhibits higher icat/ip values and faster positive potential shifts than 2+ as [H2O] increases. The unusual icat/ip dependence on [H2O] observed for 1+ and 2+ contrasts the classical behavior obtained for 3, which shows a linear increase of icat/ip with increasing [H2O]. These findings suggest that the mechanism for CO2 reduction by 1+ and 2+ is significantly altered as compared to unfunctionalized 3 and also dependent on [H2O]. While the origins of these mechanistic changes for 1+ and 2+ are subject of ongoing studies, we highlight that similar proton source dependence of icat/ip has been reported recently for manganese bipyridyl tricarbonyl catalysts containing pendant methoxy groups.6f Here the presence of secondary coordination sphere R2O groups was implicated in R2O···HO(O)C−Mn interactions which allowed for easier C−OH bond cleavage. It is reasonable to assume that for 1+ C−H···−O(O)C−Re and/or C−H··· OH2···OH(O)C−Re interactions are also implicated during catalysis. Complex 2+ on the other hand, could only feature potential interactions involving the C4−H and C5−H groups. However, these would be expected to be weaker than hydrogen bonding via C2−H moieties in 1+.18 This important difference is a likely cause for the differences in catalytic activity and selectivity between 1+ and 2+ as will be discussed in detail.

In an effort to obtain rate estimates for CO2 reduction we studied the catalytic response at varying scan rates at the optimized [H2O] of 2.8 M. The obtained icat/ip values were used to estimate TOFmax values according to eq 1.19 We found icat /i p = 4.484

RT F

TOFmax ν−1/2

(1)

that scan rate independence is nearly reached at scan rates of 4 V s−1 (Figure 4d). Although scan rate independence could not completely be achieved, it is clear that complex 1+ operates at higher rates than 2+. However, 2+ shows significantly higher rates than parent complex 3. Controlled potential electrolysis (CPE) experiments were performed for all catalysts for 1 h in the presence of 2.8 or 9.4 M H2O (Supporting Information) and the headspace after CPE was analyzed by gas chromatography (GC). CO was the only detectable reduction product after all CPE experiments. At 2.8 M H2O, 1+ consumes the largest charge with the highest faradaic efficiency generating the most CO among the three catalysts (Figure 5). We note that the charge consumed by 1+ in 2.8 M H2O is nearly twice as much as the charge consumed by 3. 2+ also consumes ∼1.5 times more charge than 3 with comparable faradaic efficiency. However, 1+ as well as 2+ show a gradual decrease in current over time (Figures S24 and S29). CVs recorded immediately after CPE experiments display the characteristic initial one-electron reductions of the complexes but a substantial decrease in the catalytic current (Figures S23 and S28). Resaturation of the solutions with CO2 did not restore the high initial catalytic currents. As such, CO2 substrate depletion or deactivation of catalysts20 likely do not contribute to decrease in catalytic currents. These findings suggest that the

Figure 5. Results from CPE experiments at [H2O] = 2.8 and 9.4 M for 1.0 mM 1+, 2+, and 3. Each column represents charge consumed by the respective catalyst. The shaded areas represent charge used for CO generation. 13995

DOI: 10.1021/jacs.7b07709 J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 13993−13996

Communication

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Energy, 2005. (b) Lewis, N. S.; Nocera, D. G. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2006, 103, 15729. (3) (a) Johnson, B. A.; Maji, S.; Agarwala, H.; White, T. A.; Mijangos, E.; Ott, S. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 1825. (b) Sun, Y.; Bigi, J. P.; Piro, N. A.; Tang, M. L.; Long, J. R.; Chang, C. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 9212. (4) (a) Smieja, J. M.; Kubiak, C. P. Inorg. Chem. 2010, 49, 9283. (b) Nippe, M.; Khnayzer, R. S.; Panetier, J. A.; Zee, D. Z.; Olaiya, B. S.; Head-Gordon, M.; Chang, C. J.; Castellano, F. N.; Long, J. R. Chem. Sci. 2013, 4, 3934. (5) Sampson, M. D.; Kubiak, C. P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2016, 138, 1386. (6) (a) Costentin, C.; Robert, M.; Savéant, J.-M.; Tatin, A. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2015, 112, 6882. (b) Agarwal, J.; Shaw, T. W.; Schaefer, H. F.; Bocarsly, A. B. Inorg. Chem. 2015, 54, 5285. (c) Neri, G.; Aldous, I. M.; Walsh, J. J.; Hardwick, L. J.; Cowan, A. J. Chem. Sci. 2016, 7, 1521. (d) Seu, C. S.; Appel, A. M.; Doud, M. D.; DuBois, D. L.; Kubiak, C. P. Energy Environ. Sci. 2012, 5, 6480. (e) Schmeier, T. J.; Dobereiner, G. E.; Crabtree, R. H.; Hazari, N. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 9274. (f) Ngo, K. T.; McKinnon, M.; Mahanti, B.; Narayanan, R.; Grills, D. C.; Ertem, M. Z.; Rochford, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 2604. (7) Azcarate, I.; Costentin, C.; Robert, M.; Saveant, J.-M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2016, 138, 16639. (8) (a) Rosen, B. A.; Salehi-Khojin, A.; Thorson, M. R.; Zhu, W.; Whipple, D. T.; Kenis, P. J. A.; Masel, R. I. Science 2011, 334, 643. (b) Medina-Ramos, J.; Pupillo, R. C.; Keane, T. P.; DiMeglio, J. L.; Rosenthal, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015, 137, 5021. (9) Grills, D. C.; Matsubara, Y.; Kuwahara, Y.; Golisz, S. R.; Kurtz, D. A.; Mello, B. A. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2014, 5, 2033. (10) (a) Hawecker, J.; Lehn, J.-M.; Ziessel, R. J. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1983, 536. (b) Hawecker, J.; Lehn, J. M.; Ziessel, R. Helv. Chim. Acta 1986, 69, 1990. (11) (a) Sullivan, B. P.; Bolinger, C. M.; Conrad, D.; Vining, W. J.; Meyer, T. J. J. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1985, 1414. (b) Wong, K.-Y.; Chung, W.-H.; Lau, C.-P. J. Electroanal. Chem. 1998, 453, 161. (c) Hayashi, Y.; Kita, S.; Brunschwig, B. S.; Fujita, E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 11976. (d) Fujita, E.; Muckerman, J. T. Inorg. Chem. 2004, 43, 7636. (e) Riplinger, C.; Sampson, M. D.; Ritzmann, A. M.; Kubiak, C. P.; Carter, E. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 16285. (12) (a) Machan, C. W.; Chabolla, S. A.; Kubiak, C. P. Organometallics 2015, 34, 4678. (b) Manbeck, G. F.; Muckerman, J. T.; Szalda, D. J.; Himeda, Y.; Fujita, E. J. Phys. Chem. B 2015, 119, 7457. (c) Coe, B. J.; Foxon, S. P.; Pilkington, R. A.; Sánchez, S.; Whittaker, D.; Clays, K.; Depotter, G.; Brunschwig, B. S. Organometallics 2015, 34, 1701. (13) Thomas, J.-L.; Howarth, J.; Hanlon, K.; McGuirk, D. Tetrahedron Lett. 2000, 41, 413. (14) Xu, Z.; Kim, S. K.; Yoon, J. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2010, 39, 1457. (15) Robillard, G.; Devillers, C. H.; Kunz, D.; Cattey, H.; Digard, E.; Andrieu, J. Org. Lett. 2013, 15, 4410. (16) Grills, D. C.; Matsubara, Y.; Kuwahara, Y.; Golisz, S. R.; Kurtz, D. A.; Mello, B. A. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2014, 5, 2033. (17) Chabolla, S. A.; Dellamary, E. A.; Machan, C. W.; Tezcan, F. A.; Kubiak, C. P. Inorg. Chim. Acta 2014, 422, 109. (18) Caballero, A.; White, N. G.; Beer, P. D. CrystEngComm 2014, 16, 3694. (19) (a) Costentin, C.; Drouet, S.; Robert, M.; Saveant, J. M. Science 2012, 338, 90. (b) Costentin, C.; Drouet, S.; Robert, M.; Savéant, J.-M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 11235. (c) Roy, S.; Sharma, B.; Pécaut, J.; Simon, P.; Fontecave, M.; Tran, P. D.; Derat, E.; Artero, V. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 3685. (20) (a) Costentin, C.; Saveant, J.-M. ChemElectroChem 2014, 1, 1226. (b) Rountree, E. S.; McCarthy, B. D.; Eisenhart, T. T.; Dempsey, J. L. Inorg. Chem. 2014, 53, 9983. (c) Benson, E. E.; Kubiak, C. P. Chem. Commun. 2012, 48, 7374. (21) Liyanage, N. P.; Dulaney, H. A.; Huckaba, A. J.; Jurss, J. W.; Delcamp, J. H. Inorg. Chem. 2016, 55, 6085. (22) Machan, C. W.; Chabolla, S. A.; Yin, J.; Gilson, M. K.; Tezcan, F. A.; Kubiak, C. P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 14598.

consumption of protons during electrolysis at low H2O concentrations causes the decreased catalytic activity. CPE experiments were also performed at 9.4 M H2O, in which reference complex 3 exhibits a higher icat/ip value. Interestingly, 1+ shows significantly improved catalytic performance in CPE experiments while 3 does not show any noticeable improvements. In fact, not only does the higher H2O concentration increase the rate for 1+ but also results in improved faradaic efficiency as well as longevity of the catalyst (Figures S37− S41). CVs recorded after CPE experiments show no obvious reduction in the catalytic current (Figure S38). However, 2+, devoid of the C2−H moiety, exhibits the lowest faradaic efficiency (35%) among the three catalysts at 9.4 M H2O although it consumes as much charge as 1+. The observed faradaic efficiencies are in good agreement with previous results for Lehn-type catalyst systems in CH3CN (61%;21 46%22). Taken together, our results show that the incorporation of intramolecular imidazolium groups into CO2 electro-reduction catalysts results in beneficial effects for catalysis. The differences in rate and selectivity between 1+ and 2+ point to the potentially crucial role of the C2−H bond of the imidiazolium moiety. To the best of our knowledge, this constitutes the first report of successfully utilizing intramolecular imidazolium groups to improve electrocatalysis. Computational results suggest that the redox-active imidazolium group does not interfere with the initial bipyridine-based reduction event. Detailed studies of the catalytic mechanism and potential imidazolium substrate interactions are currently underway.

■

ASSOCIATED CONTENT

S Supporting Information *

The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/jacs.7b07709. Experimental and computational details, including Figures S1−S51 and Tables S1−S4 (PDF) X-ray crystallographic data for 1PF6 (CIF) X-ray crystallographic data for 2PF6 (CIF)

■

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Author

*[email protected] ORCID

Michael Nippe: 0000-0003-1091-4677 Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS M.N. is grateful to the TAMU Chemistry Department for startup funds and financial support by the Welch Foundation (A1880). We thank Dr. Julien Panetier for fruitful discussions.

■

REFERENCES

(1) (a) Dubois, M. R.; Dubois, D. L. Acc. Chem. Res. 2009, 42, 1974. (b) Benson, E. E.; Kubiak, C. P.; Sathrum, A. J.; Smieja, J. M. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2009, 38, 89. (c) Schneider, J.; Jia, H.; Muckerman, J. T.; Fujita, E. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2012, 41, 2036. (d) Costentin, C.; Robert, M.; Saveant, J.-M. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2013, 42, 2423. (e) Qiao, J.; Liu, Y.; Hong, F.; Zhang, J. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 631. (f) Grice, K. A.; Kubiak, C. P. Adv. Inorg. Chem. 2014, 66, 163. (2) (a) Lewis, N. S.; Crabtree, G.; Nozik, A. J.; Wasielewski, M. R. Basic Research Needs for Solar Energy Utilization; U.S. Department of 13996

DOI: 10.1021/jacs.7b07709 J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 13993−13996